Article Figures & Data
Figures
- FIG 1.
TRs of SSFSE and vrfSSFSE. Box-and-whisker plots for each sequence are shown with the middle bar representing the median, the box representing the 25th and 75th percentiles, and the upper and lower bars representing the range. Half-Fourier vrfSSFSE (hvSSFSE) and full-Fourier vrfSSFSE (fvSSFSE) have significantly faster TRs compared with SSFSE (P < . 001). hvSSFSE has a significantly faster TR compared with fvSSFSE (P < . 001). All comparisons of TRs were assessed using the Mann-Whitney test.
- FIG 2.
Image-quality ratings of SSFSE and vrfSSFSE. Box-and-whisker plots for each image-quality parameter (Motion artifact, Sharpness: brain-fluid, and Sharpness: gray-white contrast rated on a 5-point Likert scale) for a given sequence with the middle bar representing the median, the box representing the 25th and 75th percentile, and the upper and lower bars representing the range. A, SSFSE scans scored significantly higher than both hvSSFSE and fvSSFSE scans on motion artifacts (P < . 001). hvSSFSE and fvSSFSE scans did not differ significantly for Motion artifact (P >.5). B, hvSSFSE and fvSSFSE scans were rated significantly better than SSFSE scans for Sharpness: brain-fluid (P < . 001). hvSSFSE and fvSSFSE scans did not differ significantly for Sharpness: brain-fluid (P > .2). C, hvSSFSE and fvSSFSE scans were rated significantly better than SSFSE scans for Sharpness: gray-white contrast (P < . 001). hvSSFSE and fvSSFSE scans did not differ significantly for Sharpness: gray-white contrast (P > .9). All comparisons of image-quality ratings were made using the Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test.
- FIG 3.
Example of motion-related signal loss. An 8-year-old girl presented for ventricular assessment. Half-Fourier vrfSSFSE (hvSSFSE) and full-Fourier vrfSSFSE (fvSSFSE) images show motion-related signal loss (arrows) on some of the slices that compromised image detail.
- FIG 4.
Example of image sharpness or blurring. A 3-year-old girl presented for ventricular assessment. Half-Fourier vrfSSFSE (hvSSFSE) and full-Fourier vrfSSFSE (fvSSFSE) images (arrows) show improved sharpness or reduced blurring, compared with the corresponding conventional SSFSE, particularly along the cortical margins where the cortical surface is better distinguished against the overlying subarachnoid spaces.
- FIG 5.
Example of magnified views demonstrating differences in tissue contrast. A 2-year-old boy presented for ventricular assessment. Half-Fourier vrfSSFSE (hvSSFSE) and full-Fourier vrfSSFSE (fvSSFSE) images show improved tissue contrast (arrows) that allows improved visualization of the gray-white junction, cerebellar folia detail, as well as posterior hippocampal regions.
- FIG 6.
Normal pediatric infant brain. High tissue contrast that is feasible with full-Fourier vrfSSFSE (fvSSFSE) compared with conventional SSFSE robustly delineates both gray-white differentiation as well as the myelination pattern that nearly resembles that of conventional T2-FSE. Because SSFSE is acquired with long echo trains (during which the signal intensity decays), image blurring occurs. This effect arises from the different signal intensities of each echo, depending on their individual TEs. A, An infant with premature birth history, now near-term in age, presents for screening MR imaging. Note age-appropriate myelination with dark signal in the thalamus (asterisk) and posterior limb of internal capsule (arrow). B, A 6-month-old male infant with spasmus nutans, who presented for screening MR imaging to exclude optic chiasm glioma. In this older infant, myelination has further progressed and is age-appropriate.
Tables
Motion Artifactb Sharpness: Brain-Fluidc Sharpness: gray-white contrastd SSFSE 4.6 ± 0.6 3.4 ± 0.7 3.5 ± 0.6 (0.63, substantial) (0.43, moderate) (−0.03, poor) Half-Fourier vrfSSFSE 3.8 ± 0.5 4.2 ± 0.6 4.4 ± 0.7 (0.39, fair) (0.32, fair) (0.07, slight) Full-Fourier vrfSSFSE 3.7 ± 0.5 4.1 ± 0.5 4.4 ± 0.6 (0.37, fair) (0.23, fair) (0.03, slight) Pooled (0.62, substantial) (0.47, moderate) (0.15, slight) ↵a Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test was used to compare reader image-quality ratings of sequences.
↵b SSFSE was scored significantly higher than both half- and full-Fourier vrfSSFSE for Motion Artifact (P < .001).
↵c Both vrfSSFSE sequences were rated significantly higher than SSFSE for Sharpness: Brain-Fluid (P < .001).
↵d Both vrfSSFSE sequences were rated significantly higher than SSFSE for Sharpness: gray-white contrast (P < .001).
- Table 2:
Fraction of SSFSE and vrfSSFSE scans rated highly, 4 or 5, for readers’ assessmentsa
Motion Artifactb Sharpness: Brain-Fluidc Sharpness: gray-white contrastd SSFSE 94% 37% 50% Half-Fourier vrfSSFSE 80% 91% 90% Full-Fourier vrfSSFSE 77% 96% 94% ↵a Fisher exact tests were used to compare the fraction of scans rated highly, 4 or 5, for each image-quality parameter for SSFSE and vrfSSFSE sequences.
↵b There was no statistically significant difference in the fraction of SSFSE scans rated either a 4 (very good) or 5 (excellent) for Motion-Artifact as compared to vrfSSFSE sequences (P > .1).
↵c Both vrfSSFSE sequences had a higher fraction of images rated either 4 or 5 as compared to SSFSE for Sharpness: Brain-Fluid (P < .001).
↵d Both vrfSSFSE sequences had a higher fraction of images rated either 4 or 5 as compared to SSFSE for Sharpness: Gray-White Contrast (P < .0001).
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
- No citing articles found.